the courtroom

International Conventions

COMBATANTS, PRISONERS AND CIVILIANS

Below there are international human rights instruments. Those in RED have not been ratified or acceded (even though they may have been signed) by Malta.Last update January 2015

The Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of anAdditional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III), (2005). Entered into force on 14 January 2007Malta: Signature on 08 December 2005, no ratification

Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) (1977). Entered into force on 7 December 1978Malta: Ratification/accession on 17 April 1989

Reservation made at the time of accession (Malta):1) "Article 75 of Protocol I will be applied insofar as: a) sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph 4 is not incompatible with legislation providing that any defendant, who causes a disturbance at the trial or whose presence is likely to impede the questioning of another defendant or the hearing or another witness or expert witness, may be removed from the courtroom;b) sub-paragraph (h) of paragraph 4 is not incompatible with legal provisions authorizing the reopening of proceedings that have resulted in a final declaration of conviction or acquittal."2) Article 6, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph (e) of Protocol II will be applied insofar as it is not incompatible with legislation providing that any defendant, who causes a disturbance at the trial or whose presence is likely to impede the questioning of another defendant or the hearing of a witness or expert witness, may be removed from the courtroom."

Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (1949). Entered into force on 21 October 1950Malta: Ratification/accession on 22 August 1968

Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification (Malta): "The Government of Malta wishes to state its understanding of certain articles in the Convention. "It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article should it consider, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention, that the need arises to enact ‘ ad hoc ’ legislation, in addition to or variation of existing law and practice to bring to an end any act of racial discrimination. "Further, the Government of Malta interprets the requirements in article 6 concerning `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of redress is made available and interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end." 16 December 1998Malta declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to the jurisdiction of Malta who claim to be victims of a violation by Malta of any of the rights set forth in the Convention which results from situations or events occurring after the date of adoption of the present declaration, or from a decision relating to situations or events occurring after that date.The Government of Malta recognizes this competence on the understanding that the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination shall not consider any communication without ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered or has not already been considered by another international body of investigation or settlement."